 |
PDBsum entry 2gcp
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signaling protein
|
PDB id
|
|
|
|
2gcp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Contents |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Residue conservation analysis
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
DOI no:
|
Biochemistry
46:6547-6558
(2007)
|
|
PubMed id:
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
X-ray crystal structures reveal two activated states for RhoC.
|
|
S.M.Dias,
R.A.Cerione.
|
|
|
|
| |
ABSTRACT
|
|
|
| |
|
RhoC is a member of the Rho family of Ras-related (small) GTPases and shares
significant sequence similarity with the founding member of the family, RhoA.
However, despite their similarity, RhoA and RhoC exhibit different binding
preferences for effector proteins and give rise to distinct cellular outcomes,
with RhoC being directly implicated in the invasiveness of cancer cells and the
development of metastasis. While the structural analyses of the signaling-active
and -inactive states of RhoA have been performed, thus far, the work on RhoC has
been limited to an X-ray structure for its complex with the effector protein,
mDia1 (for mammalian Diaphanous 1). Therefore, in order to gain insights into
the molecular basis for RhoC activation, as well as clues regarding how it
mediates distinct cellular responses relative to those induced by RhoA, we have
undertaken a structural comparison of RhoC in its GDP-bound (signaling-inactive)
state versus its GTP-bound (signaling-active) state as induced by the
nonhydrolyzable GTP analogues, guanosine 5'-(beta,gamma-iminotriphosphate)
(GppNHp) and guanosine 5'-(3-O-thiotriphosphate) (GTPgammaS). Interestingly, we
find that GppNHp-bound RhoC only shows differences in its switch II domain,
relative to GDP-bound RhoC, whereas GTPgammaS-bound RhoC exhibits differences in
both its switch I and switch II domains. Given that each of the nonhydrolyzable
GTP analogues is able to promote the binding of RhoC to effector proteins, these
results suggest that RhoC can undergo at least two conformational transitions
during its conversion from a signaling-inactive to a signaling-active state,
similar to what has recently been proposed for the H-Ras and M-Ras proteins. In
contrast, the available X-ray structures for RhoA suggest that it undergoes only
a single conformational transition to a signaling-active state. These and other
differences regarding the changes in the switch domains accompanying the
activation of RhoA and RhoC provide plausible explanations for the functional
specificity exhibited by the two GTPases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Literature references that cite this PDB file's key reference
|
|
 |
| |
PubMed id
|
 |
Reference
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
J.Heo
(2011).
Redox control of GTPases: from molecular mechanisms to functional significance in health and disease.
|
| |
Antioxid Redox Signal,
14,
689-724.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
M.J.Phillips,
G.Calero,
B.Chan,
S.Ramachandran,
and
R.A.Cerione
(2008).
Effector proteins exert an important influence on the signaling-active state of the small GTPase Cdc42.
|
| |
J Biol Chem,
283,
14153-14164.
|
 |
|
PDB code:
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
|
The most recent references are shown first.
Citation data come partly from CiteXplore and partly
from an automated harvesting procedure. Note that this is likely to be
only a partial list as not all journals are covered by
either method. However, we are continually building up the citation data
so more and more references will be included with time.
Where a reference describes a PDB structure, the PDB
code is
shown on the right.
|
');
}
}
 |